<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en-US"><title type="html">FOI FYI</title><subtitle type="html">&lt;img src="http://www.spj.org/images/blogheads/bh-foifyi.gif" width=835 height=165 border=0&gt;</subtitle><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/atom.aspx</id><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/default.aspx" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/atom.aspx" /><generator uri="http://communityserver.org" version="2.0.60217.2664">Community Server</generator><updated>2008-07-31T20:37:00Z</updated><entry><title>Arkansas hides details about childrens' deaths</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/28/21397.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/28/21397.aspx</id><published>2008-08-28T16:03:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-28T16:03:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;P&gt;The Arkansas Times &lt;A href="http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.aspx?ArticleID=fb522802-e480-4b78-bee5-2484ea015f91"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;writes&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt; about the state's Department of Human Services keeping secret basic details about the death of four children kept in foster care under the agency's responsibility. The agency hides behind a state law that says information regarding ongoing investigations can be kept secret. Yet, case law in the state says that some information in pending investigations should be public, such as basic information from police reports. When it comes down to it, the agency's secrecy defies common sense and folks in Arkansas should use that to shed light on an agency that is responsible for thousands of children.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The solution? The Times and other newspapers should sue and also work to change the law. It worked in Arizona last year. The Arizona Daily Star and Arizona Republic investigated a series of child deaths to find bungling in Child Protective Services. At the time the state also hid behind state law to supposedly protect people's privacy, but in reality they were out to hide massive problems in their agency. Both papers sued the state over records involving child deaths and they won. Then the Legislature approved a new law this year specifically making the case files public when a child dies in the care of CPS. It wasn't that difficult garnering public support given the atrocities some children face and the need for a strong system to protect them. Last week a federal audit of CPS showed massive failings in the system. Don't let these folks hide problems behind "privacy." Fight for openness. Fight for the children!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21397" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Sheriff denies records request, then bills newspaper $10 for asking</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/26/21390.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/26/21390.aspx</id><published>2008-08-27T00:40:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-27T00:40:00Z</updated><content type="html">Wow, this one rates in my top three wacky denials. According to an Argus-Press (Owosso, Mich.)&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://www.argus-press.com/articles/2008/08/25/news/news3.txt"&gt;story&lt;/A&gt;, the county sheriff denied the newspaper's public records request and then included a bill for $10 to mail the one-page denial letter. Zoinks! Like most state public records laws, agencies in Michigan are allowed to charge for the cost of copying records, but no state I have ever heard of allows an agency to charge someone just for asking for a record, or for being denied records. That's a slap in the face. Makes you wonder why a county's top law enforcement officer doesn't understand (or follow) the law!&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21390" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Advisers suggest Bush veto shield law</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/25/21386.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/25/21386.aspx</id><published>2008-08-26T00:05:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-26T00:05:00Z</updated><content type="html">Filed under the "No Surprises Here" drawer, top Bush officials are recommending that the president veto the federal shield law if passed by the Senate this fall. The Free Flow of Information Act may come up for a vote following the current recess, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey and National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell said Friday that the president should veto the bill if it is passed, according to an &lt;A href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iOKrDIFciVp5ds-_YOl00TMC9lZgD92NJ7580"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;AP story&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;. The advisers claim that a media shield law would harm national security and encourage more leaks of classified information. An ironic claim, given previous strategic leaks of classified information by Bush advisers, including the outing of a CIA spy. Their real concern, of course, is the continued leaks of embarrassing information that the public needs to know (e.g., government listening in on Americans' phone calls, reading e-mails, holding and torturing prisoners in foreign prisons, etc.). With any luck, enough senators will see the need for a federal shield law that they will have enough votes to override a veto. Stay tuned!&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21386" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>$20 for a police report? Mississippi city gouges public</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/25/21382.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/25/21382.aspx</id><published>2008-08-25T17:32:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-25T17:32:00Z</updated><content type="html">The city of Richland, Miss., is gouging the public for public records copies and fortunately the Clarion Ledger called them on it in a recent &lt;A href="http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080821/NEWS/808210372/1001"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;story&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;. The news story lists the outrageous charges for copies, including $20 for a copy of a police incident report. Ironically, the city increased fees in response to new state laws that were intended to make public records more easily accessible. The problem here is the law allows agencies to charge for the cost of searching, reviewing and duplicating records. The city claims it costs $20 in staff time to search, duplicate and copy a police incident report. Sounds bogus to me. If an agency makes such a claim demand to see how the charges are calculated. Does it take a clerk an hour or two to find and copy an incident report? If so, does that point to inefficiencies in the city's record keeping? To put it in perspective, think about how much Kinko's charges you to make a copy - 8 cents a page. And Kinko's, unlike&amp;nbsp;a city, is out to make a profit. The long-term solution is to change the law to prohibit agencies from charging for search and review time. Some states allow agencies to charge for the actual copying only (paper and toner). That usually reduces some of the gouging.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21382" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Senators demand information about torture</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/20/21369.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/20/21369.aspx</id><published>2008-08-20T20:47:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-20T20:47:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;P&gt;You know the government is too secretive when government oversight committees can't get information. Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., want the president to be more forthcoming about interrogation techniques, calling today for the White House to make public documents and memos regarding detention and torture of prisoners, according to a &lt;A href="http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200808/081908.html"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Leahy press release&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;. The Senate Judiciary Committee has been struggling for years to get information from the Department of Justice, but the executive branch has provided only a limited number of documents, most redacted.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A lot of people are content to allow the president and government agencies hide information for "national security" purposes on the assumption that proper oversight in government prevents abuses of that power. People assume our system of checks and balances allows Congress to make sure the president doesn't become a king or despot.&amp;nbsp;Yet, as we see&amp;nbsp;again and again, that oversight&amp;nbsp;is hampered. Citizens - and journalists - should be alarmed by this lack of oversight and transparency.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21369" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Russia-Georgia conflict: Reports to Congress can provide background on issues</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/19/21358.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/19/21358.aspx</id><published>2008-08-19T19:03:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-19T19:03:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;P&gt;Some of the best sources of background information on complicated subjects can be found in reports to Congress. While some reports may be directed toward a certain conclusion, most are informational and helpful in understanding the basics and identifying sources. Take for example the Russia-Georgia conflict. News reports are all over the map on who is to blame, but a succinct report issued Aug. 13 for Congress provides historical context that shows the complexity of the dispute (check out a &lt;A href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34618.pdf"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;copy &lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;posted at the Federation of American Scientists Web site). So tap into government reports through Congressional Research Service and other agencies that gather and disseminate information, obstensibly for elected leaders to make better informed decisions.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21358" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>North Carolina Sheriff's Deputy impersonates journalist, short-circuits shield law</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/18/21352.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/18/21352.aspx</id><published>2008-08-18T23:30:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-18T23:30:00Z</updated><content type="html">This is probably not as low as a government official can go in making a mock of the First Amendment, but it's pretty close.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As reported by the &lt;a href="http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6922"&gt;Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press&lt;/a&gt;, an Onslow County Sheriff's Deputy impersonated a journalist in order to learn who was a reporter's source on a high-profile murder story. The deputy contacted &lt;i&gt;The (Jacksonville) Daily News&lt;/i&gt;' Lindell Kay Aug. 8 and, claiming to be writer for &lt;i&gt;Newsweek&lt;/i&gt;, asked if he could talk to her source. After clearing it with the source, who wanted to talk to &lt;i&gt;Newsweek&lt;/i&gt;, Kay handed over the information.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Last week, the source, an intern in the District Attorney's office, was arrested on embezzlement and larceny charges for allegedly offering to sell a report on the murder case.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Needless to say, the source, Robert Sharpe, is not happy with the &lt;i&gt;Daily News&lt;/i&gt;, although the paper's editor said Sharpe has since called to apologize for publicly attacking the paper for not protecting his identity.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What the sheriff's office did was despicable. North Carolina has a shield law that kept the authorities from compelling Sharpe's identity from reporters. Impersonating a reporter was an end-run around the law.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Had any reporter impersonated an Onslow County deputy, you can bet that Sheriff Ed Brown wouldn't be happy, and he'd probably have the reporter arrested, even if the reporter argued that the impersonation served the public good.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://sheriff.onslowcountync.gov/The%20Sheriff.htm"&gt;Brown's Web site&lt;/a&gt; states that, "a good sheriff/servant must have a character of honesty, integrity, fairness, trustworthiness and commitment." I didn't notice an exemption for impersonating reporters.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;A reporter's most important tool is credibility. Without it, a journalist is dead in the water, just another hack. This stunt erodes some of &lt;i&gt;Newsweek's&lt;/i&gt; credibility, as well as the &lt;i&gt;Daily News&lt;/i&gt;, which was duped by this deputy. But the worst thing is it discourages whistleblowers, who may fear that the reporter who is eager to listen to him is actually a cop ready to bust him for speaking out. This is the kind of thing we expect in China or some other repressive regime, not in a country where the first article in the Bill of Rights protects both the press' right to publish and people's right to speak.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Give Sheriff Brown a call at (910)455-3113 and tell him what you think about his tactics.&lt;br&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21352" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DonaldMeyers</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DonaldMeyers.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Jack Landau, first leader of RCFP, dies</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/18/21351.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/18/21351.aspx</id><published>2008-08-18T23:08:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-18T23:08:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;P&gt;The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press' first director, Jack Landau, died Aug. 9 at the age of 74. Landau started a reporters hotline, a press censorship newsletter, and created a legal defense and advocacy organization that fights for journalists throughout the nation. See &lt;A href="http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=6917"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;more&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt; at the RCFP Web site. For a great historical research piece about Landau, the beginnings of RCFP, and a crucial time for the FOI movement, check out "First Amendment Guerillas: Formative years of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press" by Floyd J. McKay in Communication Monographs, October, 2004.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21351" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Report outlines problems, suggestions for access to military courts</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/15/21335.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/15/21335.aspx</id><published>2008-08-15T15:37:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-15T15:37:00Z</updated><content type="html">A new &lt;A href="http://www.rcfp.org/militarydockets/"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;report &lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;out today outlines major problems in access to military courts and court records, and provides a list of suggestions for improving the system. The report, produced by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, is based on interviews with journalists, lawyers, military officers and other experts. The study found that even though court-martials and other hearings should be open, more than half the facilities contacted would not provide information.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21335" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Ohio institute launches government transparency center</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21324.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21324.aspx</id><published>2008-08-11T20:21:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-11T20:21:00Z</updated><content type="html">A new center in Ohio will gather and post online state and local government budgets, contracts, and other information. The &lt;A href="http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/article/1161"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Buckeye Institute&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;will start the Center for Transparent and Accountable Government, headed by former statehouse reporter Mike Maurer. The institute also provides a &lt;A href="http://ohiosunshine.org/index.php/Main_Page"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;sunshine wiki&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;that allows activists to post information online about access issues in Ohio government. Many states have similar organizations that have been started to increase government accountability. Find one in your state and tap into its experts as sources for access stories and to build allies for pressuring government to open records and meetings.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21324" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>New York agencies must now pay legal fees for successful litigants</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21323.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21323.aspx</id><published>2008-08-11T20:00:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-11T20:00:00Z</updated><content type="html">New York Gov. David Paterson signed into law improvements to the public records law. For example, if someone sues the government over a public records denial and prevails then the government must pay for the requester's attorney fees. That is important legislation because agencies will think twice before denying a valid public records request, especially if it may cost the agency tens of thousands of dollars in covering someone else's legal fees. If you are curious how your state handles legal fees, check out the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press &lt;A href="http://www.rcfp.org/ogg/index.php"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Open Government Guide&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;or the Brechner &lt;A href="http://www.citizenaccess.org/categories.html"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Citizen Access Project&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;("attorneys' fees, requesters").&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21323" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Expose secret courts in your community</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21322.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/11/21322.aspx</id><published>2008-08-11T19:40:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-11T19:40:00Z</updated><content type="html">A great &lt;A href="http://nwanews.com/bcdr/News/64580/"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;story&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt; by The Benton County Daily Record in Arkansas demonstrates how judges have far too much discretion for sealing entire cases and even making their existence secret. Other newspapers from around the country have exposed how this practice hurts the public, particularly when it involves companies wanting to hide the fact their products harm or even kill consumers. See a &lt;A href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/yourcourtstheirsecrets/"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;great series&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;in 2006 by The Seattle Times about this issue. Also, see a &lt;A href="http://www.rcfp.org/secretjustice/secretdockets/index.html"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;2003 report&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press on secret dockets. Then, check out the extent of secret court files in your community.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21322" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Washington S.C. rules that unsubstantiated sex abuse allegations are secret</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/04/21295.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/08/04/21295.aspx</id><published>2008-08-04T22:51:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-04T22:51:00Z</updated><content type="html">The Washington Supreme Court ruled that allegations of sex abuse by teachers are secret unless substantiated, according to a &lt;A href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008085449_teachers010.html"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;story&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt; by The Seattle Times. In a 6-3 ruling, the court agreed with teacher unions in saying that privacy interests of teachers outweigh the danger of potential pedophiles in schools. Too bad, considering the Times found many teachers who abused or raped their students and nothing was done about it. Now those cases won't be known.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21295" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Cheap e-mail archiving software eliminates technical barriers to access</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/07/31/21237.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/07/31/21237.aspx</id><published>2008-08-01T00:51:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-01T00:51:00Z</updated><content type="html">&lt;P&gt;Sometimes public agencies deny public records requests for e-mail by saying they don't have a way to archive it or that it would be too expensive to manage it. They can't use that excuse anymore. Today Waterford Technologies in California posted a &lt;A href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/school-districts-get-email-archiving/story.aspx?guid=%7B6B28861E-6BE7-4ACB-ADF1-258174B27685%7D&amp;amp;dist=hppr"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;press release&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;announcing that it is selling e-mail archiving software to school districts for $99, covering unlimited number of accounts within a district.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;While I don't know how well&amp;nbsp;the software&amp;nbsp;works and I have no connection or interest in the company, they say the software can be used to comply with public records requests and for discovery in court cases without sifting through clunky backup tapes. So if you would like to request e-mail of public officials from your local school districts, and the districts use technology as a reason for denial, suggest they buy this software, or other software out there like this, or have your organization volunteer to buy it for them! With any luck, similar deals will be made available for cities, counties, state, and federal agencies.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21237" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry><entry><title>Tennessee court rules that private prisons must release documents</title><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/07/31/21236.aspx" /><id>http://spj.org/blog/blogs/foifyi/archive/2008/07/31/21236.aspx</id><published>2008-08-01T00:37:00Z</published><updated>2008-08-01T00:37:00Z</updated><content type="html">If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it must be a public agency subject to public records law. A Tennessee judge ruled this week that a private prison is subject to the state public records law because it fulfills a state function. (see &lt;A href="http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080730/NEWS03/807300423"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;story&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/A&gt;by the Tennessean).&amp;nbsp;The judge said the prison, run by Nashville-based Corrections Corporation of America,&amp;nbsp;is a "functional equivalent" to a government agency because of its essential taxpayer-funded government duties. The company plans to appeal the ruling. For a state-by-state listing of prison access laws and visitation rules, see a great &lt;A href="/prisonaccess.asp"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;guide&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt; put together by FOI Committee members Charles Davis and Joel Campbell.&lt;img src="http://spj.org/blog/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21236" width="1" height="1"&gt;</content><author><name>DavidCuillier</name><uri>http://spj.org/blog/members/DavidCuillier.aspx</uri></author></entry></feed>